The Use of Chemical Weapons: The United States Response and Strategies in The Syrian civil War

Ebrima Jatta, Omar Samba, Ahmad Sahide


This research aims at exploring the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict, in particular, the dilemma of the American policymakers in response to the use of prohibited weapons in the Syrian conflict. The use of chemical weapons in Syria has been a major source of tension, but one could wonder what were the strategies employed by the US in responding to use of chemical weapons in Syria. Syrian crisis has been marked by a number of horrible acts of conventional violence, we can see that this conventional brutality was insufficient to lead to the US interventionist foreign policy. Why was it thought that the use of chemical weapons would determine whether or not the US would intervene militarily? These are some of the issues that this paper typically identifies. The study collected, examined, and analyzed secondary data on the US response using a qualitative case study approach. The arguments produced in this study were based on three theoretical frameworks: constructivism, strategic narrative, and framing concept. According to the study's findings, there have been three major strategies. The US utilized framing, the taboo against chemical weapons, and intervention strategies in carrying out a response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria.


United States; Syrian Civil War; Chemical Weapons; Strategic Narrative; Framing Effects

Full Text:



BBC News. (2012). Obama warns Syria chemical weapons use may spark US action. BBC News.

Bentley, M. (2014). Strategic taboos: chemical weapons and US foreign policy. 5, 1033–1048.

Bentley, M. (2017). Critical Studies on Security Instability and incoherence: Trump, Syria, and chemical weapons. Critical Studies on Security, 00(00), 1–5.

Blake, J., & Aqsa, M. (2013). Legal Red Line: Syria and the Use of Chemical Weapons in Civil Conflict. UCLA L. Rev, Discourse (244), 246–260.

Copeland, D. C. (2005). The constructivist challenge to structural realism: A review essay. In Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and his Critics (Vol. 25, pp. 1–20). The MIT Press.

Diab, M. Z. (1997). Syria’s chemical and biological weapons: Assessing capabilities and motivations. Nonproliferation Review, 5(1), 104–111.

Dr. Kars de Bruijne, S. van der M. (2018). Chemical weapons in Syria: do retaliatory bombardments deter their usage ? Clingendael Policy Brief, July.

Finney, N. (2013). On “US Options in Syria.” Parameters, 43(4), 138.

Frisch, D. (1993). Reasons for Framing Effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

Hersh, S. M. (2013). Whose sarin ? London Review of Books, 35(24), 9–12.

JASSER, M. Z. (2014). JASSER, M. ZUHDI. “Sectarian Conflict in Syria.” PRISM, vol. 4, 2014, pp. 58–67. PRISM Institute for National Strategic Security, National Defense University, 4(4), 58–67.

Jeong, H. W. (2008). Understanding conflict and conflict analysis. In Understanding Conflict and Conflict Analysis. SAGE publications.

John W. Creswell. (2018). Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications Inc.

Kimball, D. (2019). Timeline of Syrian Chemical Weapons Activity, 2012-2019. Arms Control Association, March, 2012–2019.

Laub, Z., & Masters, J. (2013). Syria’s Crisis and the Global Response. Council on Foreign Relations.

Mintz, A., & Redd, S. B. (2003). Framing effects in international relations. Synthese, 135(2), 193–213.

Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2015). Strategic Narratives: a response. Critical Studies on Security, 3(3), 341–344.

OCHA. (2019). United Nations Statistics. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Pita, R., & Domingo, J. (2014). The Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Conflict. Toxics, 2(3), 391–402.

Quandt, W. B., Freedman, L., & Karsh, E. (1993). The Gulf Conflict, 1990-1991: Diplomacy and War in the New World Order. Foreign Affairs.


Schmitt, M., & Ford, C. (2017). Assessing U.S. justifications for using force in response to Syria’s chemical attacks: an international law perspective.

Sterling, J. (2012). Daraa: The Spark that lit the Syrian flame. CNN. Retrieved December, 15, 2013.

The New York Times. (2018). U.S. Says Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons at Least 50 Times During War - The New York Times. The New York Times.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science.

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what Sates Make of it - annotated.pdf. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.

Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. In Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications (K. DeRosa, Ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding (IJMMU) ISSN 2364-5369
Copyright © 2014-2018 IJMMU. All rights reserved.